Home > Election 2008 > Down into the Sewer, Just Like the Republicans

Down into the Sewer, Just Like the Republicans

March 8th, 2008

Hillary’s campaign is beginning to become way too Republican-esque for my comfort. First we had the negative campaigning when Obama fought a relatively clean and positive race; when that backfired, Hillary started lying about Obama’s record, often right to his face, claiming she had iron-clad evidence when she clearly did not. Then there was the double-dealing “I respect Obama and am honored to be with him” on TV followed by “Shame on you Barack Obama!” on the campaign trail. Then came the ultra-negative attacks leading up to Texas and Ohio, which finally successfully dragged Obama down into the mud that Hillary had been wallowing in for a while. Then there was the opportunistic grab at what was clearly a conservative dirty-tricks tactic with the Canadian NAFTA scam. And then there were the campaign claims (that she and McCain had “crossed that threshold” for being CinC, but Obama had not) that actually benefit McCain and can help him win, especially against Obama–kind of a scorched-earth tactic.

But a recurring theme in the Clinton campaign is to delve into hypocrisy, especially when attacking the Obama campaign for things her campaign has done, often times to a greater degree. She attacked Obama for criticizing her on health care, which she did against Obama far more often. She attacked him on exaggerated claims on mailers, which she often did. She blasted him for plagiarism, but was guilty of far worse passage-lifting than Obama–and then made the straight-faced claim that it was OK for her to do it. She criticized him for the Harry-and-Louise image, but now has published a far, far more questionable image of Obama which desaturates, darkens, and broadens his face, along the lines of the anti-Harold-Ford ads Republicans stewed up. She attacked him on the Canadian NAFTA thing to great effect, when all along the Canadians said Hillary was there first, doing the same thing.

And now, Hillary is bashing Obama, this time for an aide calling Hillary a “monster.” Forget that it was off the record, forget that it was an offhand comment by an aide. Forget that the aide apologized and was fired. Hillary is making huge hay of this, dragging it to the bank again and again. The hypocrisy? Clinton aides make those kinds of comments about Obama all the time. And nothing ever comes of it.

I am OK with the idea of Hillary being a “fighter,” but not a complete and utter disgrace–in other words, a Republican-style fighter. I’ll still vote for her over McCain of she wins the nomination, but it will be with more than a little disdain and disgust. Clinton took what was a grand and glorious Democratic run, and has dragged it into the sewer. In a clean race, Obama wins. I don’t know if I want to pay this high a price for a Democratic win. I’ll pay it, if I am forced to–but I will not like it.

Categories: Election 2008 Tags: by
  1. ykw
    March 9th, 2008 at 15:13 | #1

    I think Hillary would be good as a VP running mate to Obama, with Bill as Sec of State. I know that Hillary supporters would favor it the other way around, yet Hillary does not have the votes for that, unless she starts doing extremely well in some upcoming contests (e.g. 60% to 40%).

  2. Tim Kane
    March 9th, 2008 at 19:58 | #2

    YKW: That idea nets no new states for Obama. I’m thinking he should pick Schwietzer from Montana, he’ll could then pick up a couple of Great Plains and Eastern Slope of the Rockies states, like Montana, New Mexico and Colorado.

    If the Democrats have a future, its grafting those states onto their urban core. Without those states, Bush does get elected.

Comments are closed.